Should there be a war on terror and how/who should it be fought?

If you're going to insult me, at least do it properly. The word is diagnosis, which still doesn't make much sense. Prognosis is the predicted outcome of a disease. Calling someone dumb is not a prediction of a disease, or a disease period. It's a level of intelligence or lack of.

And how is my statement unintelligent? I'm all for learning new things, no sarcasm. So, are you saying the the terrorism would have stopped if we just sat around and did nothing?

no it's a disease and you seem to have it. now go get that looked at.
*edited*


I'll answer you with a question: Why do you think the U.S. suffered attacks on 9/11; from doing "nothing?"

Oh forget it!
I just edited this post on accident [by rewriting a whole new one thinking i was posting a new one.]and I don't remember what the post said before that....
I may have just proved that point about being dumb! Score! :)

It was answer to your question though.

But in the grand scheme of things it's not important ....

This is true and when you look through the posts how many of the ones that say they are opposed turn around and ask why don't you attact .....

America should get their best bombers into South Waziristan and just go mad. Al Qaeda is believed to be regrouping there. Bomb it to smithereens. The Pakistani presence is weak and cowardly there, time to go wild and start wiping out these terrorists. What d'ya say Celinski? No half measures, back to the shock and awe?

no, i answered the question just fine, you haven't figured out the answer but that's not my fault, champ. when you correctly answer the question i put forth you'll have figured out my answer. it's that simple, but make sure you get it right, champ!

I actually wrote that post before you edited yours and answered my question with a question...which is when I fixed mine as well. But thanks for all the sarcasm.

^^before I edited what? I wrote a post in response to yours, get your head together champ, too much bobbing and weaving and not enough staying in the pocket and having a proper go at it. tell yah what champ, i got some things to do so i gotta split, when i get back, i expect you'll have uncovered my answer. ok champ, good luck:)

You had written that being dumb was a disease and I had it.... "that is all" so I responded by saying you didn't answer my question... by the time I posted that you had edited yours and answered my question...
to which I also responded to yours....

Sometimes it's not even worth the explanation. Now being one of those times.
I'm sure you already knew what I was referring to, chief.

Terrorism as a political tool is, by now, well established. Expect to see the name Jundullah enter the newsmedia more in February, that is, if Iran doesn't play its cards right. There have been allegations of American funding for this terrorist organisation which serves to undermine Iran, but no proof

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jundallah, here's some background on them.

America or did you mean to say Russia?

Israel, Russia and the Iranian Nuclear Program

Russia sent the first, and two weeks later, the second consignment of low-enriched uranium to the station. This was all but a shock and not only to Israel. American experts are analyzing scenarios where a year after the station's commissioning, Iran will have highly-enriched plutonium - almost good enough to produce up to 20 nuclear charges.


http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080118/97239716.html

Celinski, I think u have misunderstood the word 'undermine'. Undermine is negative, not positive. Jundallah attacks Iran's national apparatus so America appreciates these weakening strikes. That's what I was getting at. How is the American press treating Russia's meddling in the Middle East?

This is just what I felt should happen.

Six powers agree on new resolution on Iran's nuclear program

BERLIN, January 22 (RIA Novosti) - The five permanent UN Security Council members and Germany coordinated on Tuesday the text of a new resolution on Iran's controversial nuclear program, Germany's foreign minister said.

"Today we together agreed on the contents of such a new resolution," Frank-Walter Steinmeier announced, following talks with his counterparts from the United States, Britain, France, China and Russia.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080122/97551926.html



For the most part they really ignore Russia. In fact most of my info comes out of Russia and Pres. Bush really just ignores or says we can understand their concerns. I did notice they remembered this time to (stroke his ego) by saying right up front they intend to update Russia on the progress. I think more of the info I read has to do with the past needing ownership and resolve. Trust is a factor whenever dealing with Russia due to history being ignored.

Good article again Celinski. I know this is not a popular line with the international community at large, but I believe that Iran has the right to pursue the means to generate nuclear energy. As the French premiere said today, oil looks set to run out in 40 years and gas in 100. He was in nuclear talks with the UAE today. He's doing nuclear deals with an Arabic country, that could also be condemned by some. Iran is not an Arabic country but we should take seriously their anti-Israeli stance and comments. However, some things need to be left to trust, I'm not a big fan of the pre-emptive strike doctrine being bandied around. Iran needs to examine alternative sources of energy and 'going nuclear' appears to be a viable option. America fears that Iran will abuse their privelege given their ties to terror but America terrorises too, many countries do in some form or other. I'm gonna try and see the American perspective more tho

ok, ok, ok, you're flustered, I'll spell it out for ya.

well if you support the notion that it was an Osama organized attack on 9/11 (despite being on the most wanted list without anything written in connection with 9/11-check it out for yourself) then you'd have to listen to the reason he allegedly gave for the attack. The reason was due to the US presence in the middle east. So i'd hardly call that doing nothing would you? He wanted the u.s. presence out of his home (apparantly) and the u.s. government didn't listen (apparantly).

Now if all that is true, then it would hardly make sense for the bush administration to put even more of an american presence in the middle east after this event. Keep in mind that these are sovereign states whose populations haven't ever benefited from american intervention, ever (don't bring up saddam as it was due to uncle sam that he even got into the position he had). It seems the only people who want americans in the middle east are either americans or zionitsts from, you guessed it, america, now living in israel. The majority of the region would like the american presence gone, but the american presence stays, strange how that is.

Wierd how if the u.s. policy makers got your boys and girls out of there you could focus on other things in your country, but now that terror is here to stay you guys will never get the chance.

In a nutshell, that's it. Israel needs an FW De Klerk kind of character at the helm and not these hardliners. Look at how he paved the way for Mandela's transformation

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1993/klerk-bio.html

Foreigner,
Not to be a smart ass but I'm curious as to where you get your information?
We're speaking so much about the Iraq war now. Ya know, honestly I'm all for pulling the troops out. It's not just people I know there, it's my family too. So I can't really argue any point as to why we should stay.
However, if Americans did leave, the terrorists would likely follow on to American soil. Then what?

Terrorists are already on American soil Topolski. The stirring of the hornet nest theory, propounded by Bush, says that American presence alone will draw out the terrorists. The same terrorists won't necessarily follow on to US soil. And what if they did, well, isn't it easier to fight battles on ur home turf with the backing of law enforcement? I'm not going deep here Topolski, just a superficial skim, call it a basic primer

You're right, they are in America already. A presidential candidate, for example. .... just kidding, that's terrible. Poor Barrack. Anyway, I should have been more specific. More terrorism like 9/11. I'm just speaking hearsay, so I don't really have any substantial argument. :)

Well, you're on the government's watch list now. You might as well say goodbye to us all now.

In case I never see you again, PEACE, and give them hell.


***I love the US government, and I was never a member of the Nazi Party. Down with fascists!***

Hey El Gato, not lookin for a seat in the Carlyle Group, now r ya? Back to the point, I think there need to be more reported raids/forays into key territory. As many newspapers have noticed, it's all too quiet at the moment.

Naw, I was only kidding. And besides why would I be on the watchlist?? Because I said something about a presidential candidate?

He's kidding, remember, America as the Police State, the culture of fear, u'll see it more, don't worry. LOL

How embarrassing. This should be ringing a bell considering I was born and raised in America......no comment! haha

that's all it takes to get the gestapo to knock on your door.. err.. i mean homeland security.. what i sad joke.

homeland security? :)

I was just playing the cynical hack, portraying America as the usurper of civil rights and freedoms. To be honest, I've heard about the Patriot Act and this proposed extensive computer checking, bordering on paranoia, but I haven't researched it fully. I do take issue with America in relation to informants. There was a $25,000 reward for anybody with info on 3 key terrorists. A guy came forward as he knew them and was prepared to volunteer info but the FBI turned him away. Why? Bcoz they could have been dragged into a scandal as the guy also had incriminating evidence on them. U need to use ur sources better as a country and follow through more completely on leads. Bush even said so

they are here and just waiting to get the chance to meet their virgins. What many refuse to see is after 911 they need to upstage the last attack.

When we talk about our civil rights there is a very fine line and Americans watch this line closely, new options are looked at to protect, not that they can or should be used.

I guess they reside the White House after Monica disappeared.



This time they will hit on UFOs.

I am not afraid of the USA goverment. In fact, I am glad they have upped security and alot of the flaws that came out on 911 are being resolved. You have to remember it is also the citizens of the USA that are pointing out where tightened security are needed. Ego's where one of the worst issues, the I know something you don't know, working as a team is not as easy as many seem to think. Confidencial information put this country in a bad spot. If you were at times square on New years or watched it on TV, we don't look all that frightened to me.